According to the details of the case LTU-II had created a demand against the taxpayer M/s Awan Trading Co. making additions in the company’s revenues.

The taxpayer through the counsel submitted that in the present case department raised unjustified demand from the taxpayer intentionally ignoring the admitted facts.

The demand/recovery order is based upon surmises and conjectures having no legal sanctity and therefore, any coercive action for effecting recovery of assessed amount of tax against the taxpayer would be equally unjust and improper.

The demand was raised without applying conscious judicious mind. The issues involved in the case are debatable and balance of convince is in favour of the taxpayer. Further, if the stay is not granted the taxpayer would have suffered irreparable loss.

Department Representative on the other hand, strongly opposed the stay application. He contended that the taxpayer has been assessed in accordance with law and therefore, liable to pay the amount determined as outstanding against the taxpayer.

Member Judicial observed that at this stage without touching the merits of case, it is deemed appropriate to grant stay against recovery of balance amount for 30 days or till the decision of main appeal pending before this tribunal whichever is earlier.